From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 12385
Date: 2002-02-18
Even in the classical period only educated Romans were careful about their aitches, or at least thought they were. The spelling of names, especially foreign ones, is particularly inconsistent, irrespective of whether the <h-> is etymological or not: Annibal/Hannibal, Adria/Hadria, Adrianus/Hadrianus, Iberia/Hiberia, Ivernia/Hibernia. The <ch-> spelling of early Germanic names (<Chatti>, etc.) guarantees a Germanic *x-, but <h-> can't be trusted to stand for a real speech segment.
"The aspiration h, on its way out of use from the time before Latin writing, served in the later language only as an orthographic sign, giving rise to much confusion: on the one hand, ac, ortus, ordeum, aduc, etc. for hac, hortus, hordeum, adhuc, on the other, habundare, perhennis, choibere, hanelare (cf. Fr. haleiner) for abundare, perennis, cohibere, anhelare."
http://www.orbilat.com/Latin/Medieval_Latin/Dag_Norberg/01.html
----- Original Message -----From: george knyshSent: Monday, February 18, 2002 8:14 PMSubject: Re: [tied] Re: A "Germanic" query
--- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@......, "caraculiambro" <gpiotr@......>
(wrote that if "Heruli" and *erilaz are cognates,
then)
the <h-> is parasitic, as in
> "Hermanaric" =
> > Ermana-ri:ks or "Hermunduri" with the same
> intensive prefix. The
> > occurrence of such prothetic aitches in Germanic
> names cited by
> > Classical sources is a reflection the fact that
> late Latin
> > orthographic <h-> was already mute.
> >
> > Piotr
> >
> Torsten
*****GK: I suppose that Ammianus' "Halani" for "Alani"
would also be parasitic.*****
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.